SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Comparison of Distribution‐ and Anchor‐Based Approaches to Infer Changes in Health‐Related Quality of Life of Prostate Cancer Survivors
16 references·0 citing·26 second hop
Comparison of Distribution‐ and Anchor‐Based Approaches to Infer Changes in Health‐Related Quality of Life of Prostate Cancer Survivors (2012)Comparison of Distribution‐ and Anchor‐Ba…The minimal detectable change cannot reliably replace the minimal important difference (2009)The minimal detectable change…Recommended methods for determining responsiveness and minimally important differences for patient-reported outcomes (2007)Recommended methods for deter…Interpreting clinically significant changes in patient‐reported outcomes (2007)Interpreting clinically signi…Minimally important change determined by a visual method integrating an anchor-based and a distribution-based approach (2006)Minimally important change de…Comparison of the minimally important difference for two health state utility measures: EQ-5D and SF-6D (2005)Comparison of the minimally i…Reliable change and minimum important difference (MID) proportions facilitated group responsiveness comparisons using individual threshold criteria (2004)Reliable change and minimum i…Interpretation of Changes in Health-related Quality of Life (2003)Interpretation of Changes in …Defining clinically meaningful change in health-related quality of life (2003)Defining clinically meaningfu…Methods to Explain the Clinical Significance of Health Status Measures (2002)Methods to Explain the Clinic…Many faces of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID): a literature review and directions for future research (2002)Many faces of the minimal cli…Further Evidence Supporting an SEM-Based Criterion for Identifying Meaningful Intra-Individual Changes in Health-Related Quality of Life (1999)Further Evidence Supporting a…Assessing the minimal important difference in symptoms: A comparison of two techniques (1996)Assessing the minimal importa…Determining a minimal important change in a disease-specific quality of life questionnaire (1994)Determining a minimal importa…The MOS 36-ltem Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) (1992)The MOS 36-ltem Short-Form He…The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. (1992)The MOS 36-item short-form he…Measurement of health status (1989)Measurement of health statusSF-36 health survey: Manual and interpretation guide (2003)Minimal changes in health status questionnaires: distinction between minimally detectable change and minimally important change (2006)A point of minimal important difference (MID): a critique of terminology and methods (2011)Sensitivity to change and minimal clinically important difference of the 7-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder Questionnaire (GAD-7) (2020)The Sickness Impact Profile: Development and Final Revision of a Health Status Measure (1981)Measuring Health-Related Quality of Life (1993)Core outcome domains for chronic pain clinical trials: IMMPACT recommendations (2003)The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. (1956)Measurement in Medicine: A Practical Guide (2011)Effect Sizes for Interpreting Changes in Health Status (1989)The COSMIN checklist for evaluating the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties: A clarification of its content (2010)Psychometric properties of the EQ-5D-5L: a systematic review of the literature (2020)The MOS Short-form General Health Survey (1988)Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires (2006)The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) (1993)Short screening scales to monitor population prevalences and trends in non-specific psychological distress (2002)A Brief Measure for Assessing Generalized Anxiety Disorder (2006)ISOQOL recommends minimum standards for patient-reported outcome measures used in patient-centered outcomes and comparative effectiveness research (2013)Sleep Health: Can We Define It? Does It Matter? (2014)Evaluating patient-based outcome measures for use in clinical trials. (1998)Estimation of minimally important differences in EQ-5D utility and VAS scores in cancer (2007)A review of studies mapping (or cross walking) non-preference based measures of health to generic preference-based measures (2009)Representativeness of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Internet panel (2010)Relationship of subjective and objective social status with psychological and physiological functioning: Preliminary data in healthy, White women. (2000)SF-36 Health Survey Update (2000)An Ultra-Brief Screening Scale for Anxiety and Depression: The PHQ-4 (2009)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 1992The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection.33,714 cited
  • 1992The MOS 36-ltem Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36)30,026 cited
  • 1989Measurement of health status4,979 cited
  • 2003Interpretation of Changes in Health-related Quality of Life4,692 cited
  • 2007Recommended methods for determining responsiveness and minimally important differences for patient-reported outcomes2,372 cited
  • 1994Determining a minimal important change in a disease-specific quality of life questionnaire1,824 cited
  • 2002Methods to Explain the Clinical Significance of Health Status Measures1,505 cited
  • 2005Comparison of the minimally important difference for two health state utility measures: EQ-5D and SF-6D1,341 cited
  • 2003Defining clinically meaningful change in health-related quality of life1,333 cited
  • 1999Further Evidence Supporting an SEM-Based Criterion for Identifying Meaningful Intra-Individual Changes in Health-Related Quality of Life861 cited
  • 2002Many faces of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID): a literature review and directions for future research514 cited
  • 2004Reliable change and minimum important difference (MID) proportions facilitated group responsiveness comparisons using individual threshold criteria487 cited
  • 2006Minimally important change determined by a visual method integrating an anchor-based and a distribution-based approach385 cited

Only edges whose both ends are imported exist here. Widen the year window, or show the whole map. Back to the work

  • 1996Assessing the minimal important difference in symptoms: A comparison of two techniques372 cited
  • 2009The minimal detectable change cannot reliably replace the minimal important difference356 cited
  • 2007Interpreting clinically significant changes in patient‐reported outcomes305 cited
  • Cited by

    No citing works inside the corpus for this window.